Deja vu?

Image: Libyans wave the flag of the Kingdom of

The U.N. has passed a resolution for no-fly zone for Libya.   Notice who has veto power and which countries obviously did not join the party.  Is this a positive step to end the current conflict or is it just one more step closer to all out war in another Arab country?   What are your thoughts?



Filed under terror, WAR

4 responses to “Deja vu?

  1. indypendent

    A cease fire has been declared by the Foreign Minister of Libya. Good news – if true – but the problem is still not resolved.

  2. indypendent

    Has anyone been following the developments of this Libya mess? President Obama was just on television and basically said that Gaddafi has been given ample warnings and he has got to go. Then in the other breath, Obama said the US will not go in alone and he has not deployed ground troops.

    My reaction to this is……..has not deployed ground troops YET.

    I still think we are headed for another war in another Arab country and it will appear like the US is once again meddling into a Muslim country because we hate Muslims.

    I wonder if all those war-loving Republicans who have demonizing Obama for not be willling to go in and bomb Libya are praising Obama now? Probably, not …..these are the same folks who still think Obama is an illegitimate president and is one of the Muslims. So they will still HATE Obama but they will certainly love all the war profits..

    I wonder if this prospect of a new war will change some of these elphants’ minds and start being willing to pay taxes?

    Aw, now I am really just wishing for the moon to be made of cream cheese – huh?

    • wicked

      Just one more damned-if-we-do-damned-if-we-don’t things.

      What was it my mother used to say? Oh, yeah. “Can’t win for losing.” Which I never understood. LOL

  3. Zippy

    I supported the action in Libya, albeit after much soul-searching.

    I am not “happy” about it–no sane person should ever be happy about the use of military force (and I hope to never see again the kind of war-cheerleading we saw under both Bushes) . But Obama got this one exactly right–it is truly an international response this time, with the full support–indeed, insistence–of the Arab League. And it is a limited goal, the protection of civilians, although Sarkozy has equated it with supporting the opposition.

    I see both goals as worthy but conflating them could lead to the dreaded “mission creep.” It is up to the Libyan people to determine their own future. In that regard, the US War Powers Resolution of 1973, although widely ignored, is still applicable.

    It is nonetheless important that this is not a declaration of war, for the stated goal is not to depose Ghaddafi (as much he sucks), but to protect Libyans from an imminent extermination and, perhaps, the ability to determine their own destiny.

    While this may not be an equivalent situation, the US reluctance to engage in Rwanda–after the fiasco of Somalia–came to mind. And I considered both before I signed my name to anything.

    I also believe that Saudi Arabia should get out of Bahrain, and, to the extent that’s even possible, we should pressure the House of Saud to do so. As leery as I am of the sectarian nature of the conflict there (Shiite rebels under a repressive Sunni government), supporting representative democracy is the only way to go.